Kamme O v. Texas A&M University & System, et al
| KAMME O |
| KAYE BALL, MICHAEL K. YOUNG, TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY AND SYSTEM, RAY BONIALLA, MARK HUSSEY and BARBARA ABERCROMBIE |
| 20-20183 |
| March 30, 2020 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on May 26, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| SUPPLEMENTAL ELECTRONIC RECORD ON APPEAL REQUESTED FROM DISTRICT COURT for 4:17-CV-3877. Electronic ROA due on 06/10/2020. [20-20183] (SDH) [Entered: 05/26/2020 10:13 AM] |
| COURT ORDER granting Appellant's opposed motion to supplement the record on appeal with the audio of the November 20, 2015 Texas A&M University meeting, with transcript (exhibits 4A & 4B) as well as other exhibits as outlined within the motion filed by Appellant Kamme O [ # 9317256-2 ]; IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Appellant's opposed motion to suspend briefing until the supplemental record is completed is GRANTED, but one extension only. [ # 9317256-3 ] A/Pet's Brief deadline canceled [20-20183] (SDH) [Entered: 05/26/2020 10:03 AM] |
| The Motion to supplement the record on appeal filed by Appellant Mr. Kamme O in 20-20183 [ # 9317256-2 ], Motion to suspend briefing notice filed by Appellant Mr. Kamme O in 20-20183 [ # 9317256-3 ] has been made sufficient. Sufficient Mtn/Resp/Rpl deadline satisfied. [20-20183] (SDH) [Entered: 05/21/2020 08:56 AM] |
| MOTION filed by Appellant Mr. Kamme O to supplement the record on appeal with audio of the 11/20/2015 TAMU meeting and exhibits as outlined within the motion [9317256-2], to suspend briefing notice dated 05/06/2020 [9317256-3]. Date of service: 05/20/2020 Document is insufficient for the following reasons: a certificate of conference and certificate of compliance is required. Additionally, the motion is incorrectly addressed the the Fifth Circuit in Gretna Sufficient Mtn/Resp/Reply due on 06/01/2020 for Appellant Kamme O [20-20183] (SDH) [Entered: 05/20/2020 01:41 PM] |
| APPEARANCE FORM FILED by Attorney Yvonne Denise Bennett for Appellee Texas A&M University and System in 20-20183 [20-20183] (SDH) [Entered: 05/07/2020 07:41 AM] |
| APPEARANCE FORM received from Ms. Yvonne Denise Bennett for Texas A&M University and System for the court's review. Lead Counsel? Yes. [20-20183] (Yvonne Denise Bennett ) [Entered: 05/06/2020 01:29 PM] |
| BRIEFING NOTICE ISSUED A/Pet's Brief Due on 06/15/2020 for Appellant Kamme O. [20-20183] (CMB) [Entered: 05/06/2020 11:35 AM] |
| ELECTRONIC RECORD ON APPEAL FILED. Exhibits on File in District Court? No. Electronic ROA deadline satisfied. [20-20183] (CMB) [Entered: 05/06/2020 11:34 AM] |
| ELECTRONIC RECORD ON APPEAL REQUESTED FROM DISTRICT COURT for 4:17-CV-3877. Electronic ROA due on 05/19/2020. [20-20183] (SDH) [Entered: 05/04/2020 09:36 AM] |
| DISTRICT COURT ORDER of 05/04/2020 granting IFP for Appellant Mr. Kamme O. [20-20183] (SDH) [Entered: 05/04/2020 09:01 AM] |
| DISTRICT COURT ORDER of 04/29/2020 denying motion for reconsideration, dkt #67. [20-20183] (DDL) [Entered: 04/30/2020 01:06 PM] |
| CASE CAPTION updated. Appellee Barbara Abercrombie added to case. Reason: party limit case-adding 5th unrepresented party. [20-20183] (LLL) [Entered: 04/08/2020 03:17 PM] |
| INITIAL CASE CHECK by Attorney Advisor complete, Action: Case OK to Process after monitoring for motion to reconsider. [9287652-2] Initial AA Check Due satisfied. [20-20183] (LLL) [Entered: 04/06/2020 10:47 AM] |
| PARTY LIMIT CASE. (FOR A FULL LIST OF PARTIES FOR THIS APPEAL, PLEASE REFER TO THE DISTRICT COURT'S DOCKET SHEET.) [20-20183] (LLL) [Entered: 03/30/2020 08:57 AM] |
| CIVIL RIGHTS CASE docketed. NOA filed by Appellant Mr. Kamme O [20-20183] (LLL) [Entered: 03/30/2020 08:56 AM] |
Access additional case information on PACER
Access the Case Summary and Docket Report to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
